A Quote by Martin Kippenberger

Assuming roles is something that simply won't work for me, since I don't have a style. None at all. — © Martin Kippenberger
Assuming roles is something that simply won't work for me, since I don't have a style. None at all.
For me, as an actor, just to keep acting and to keep being able to work and to do different roles and challenging roles, that's something I'd love to do.
We are now assuming that we have here the centre and goal of all God's works, and therefore the hidden beginning of them all. We are also assuming that the prominent place occupied by this divine work has something corresponding to it in the essence of God, that the Son forms the centre of the Trinity, and that the essence of the divine being has, so to speak, its locus ... in His work, in the name and person of Jesus Christ.
People often ask me why I don't take up more heroine-oriented roles. My question is, 'Where are these roles?' I really appreciate actresses who sign only films with meaty roles. However, there aren't too many of them. The industry is simply male-dominated.
But everything written has style. The list of ingredients on the side of a cornflakes box has style. And everything literary has literary style. And style is integral to a work. How something is told correlates with - more - makes what's being told. A story is its style.
I have never shied away from looking old or playing older roles on TV, since I feel my audiences know the real me, so why not have fun with roles that are not me.
Roles that involved, whether it be training, whether it be physicality, getting skinny, there's some investment. There are roles that you do like that and sometimes there are roles that you do to make sure your family doesn't starve, but then you have to still say, "Is there something I can do with this? Can I do something with this that will be fair to the people watching it and fair to my time as well?" I'm at the point where that luxury of choice is getting more and more for me, absolutely, but it's more primarily roles that are more demanding of me in every way.
So there is a personal sense of style for a given work - I don't like a general style, but every work has its own style, and I want to create a style for every work.
Let me tell you something: The only thing that separates women of color from anyone else is opportunity. You cannot win an Emmy for roles that are simply not there.
Everyone has their style and your style explains a lot about who you are - you feel me? I've had style since childhood, so I like to dress how I feel. But maybe I get carried away by some trends.
He who has nothing to assert has no style and can have none: he who has something to assert will go as far in power of style as its momentousness and his conviction will carry him
All my stories are webs of style and none seems at first blush to contain much kinetic matter. For me style is matter.
I simply can't do one-word message replies: Yes. Ok. No. Sure. Cool. None of these are options for me. I must write something extra. Something personal. I put kisses and emoticons. Emoticons, by the way, are my very best friends. They have removed all the pressure of thinking up something personal to say.
Comparison is a disease. I never felt any competition, since I never compared myself to others. I only focus on my work. I never feel pressurised and do films in my style. Also, I'm very active since childhood, and that gives me the edge to always put my best.
If more women are in leadership roles, we'll stop assuming they shouldn't be.
You know, comments about style always seem strange to me - 'why do you work in this style, or in that style' - as if you had a choice in the matter... What you're doing is trying to stay alive and continue and not die.
In the end, there's something of the puritan work ethic about me that roles really must sustain me on an intellectual level.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!